I was being a little tongue in cheek about the test. I thought about another way to discredit them or even silence their beliefs, but I won't float that as I'd appear bonkers.
It just feels that the hoax theory started with some very basic claims that have all been debunked: shadows, stars, fluttering flags, film speed, rocks, radiation, Buzz in the crater, no photos of Armstrong, computer power, Aldrin's boot print and so forth.
I was having a discussion many years ago and someone suggested that Bill Kaysing's book was intended to be jocular; if I recall he wrote under a pseudonym - Randy Read. Ralph Rene took it a little further with radiation and C-rocks. One only has to see the Ralph Rene interviews to understand you could not take him seriously. The whole theory has morphed into an inconsistent mish mash of hundreds of claims that have no merit. That's not a theory.
Our recently departed friend described the theory as unpicking clues or magic, and finding alternative explanations until they could be proved wrong by viable alternatives. This is goal post moving.
Thanks to Fox, the theory has long been out of control in terms of its claims and the people that peddle it, there's often a cash cow element attached to their motives. The theory even incorporates rebuttals as new evidence. Film speed change is one such example. Our friend explained that the figure could range from 40% to about 60% depending on the situation. The original claim was 50%. The 60% figure was derived because of a dumb mistake and doubling down on that mistake. The 40% because some have twigged the (1.67/9.81)1/2 ratio has merit. Once the 50% figure was debunked, that should have been the end - period. There is no more debate. The theory has no merit.
Don't debate new claims above those that were initially proposed, simply point them to the original claims and discuss these. Nothing else. Here's the theory Bill Kaysing/Ralph Rene set out, do you agree these are the constraints of the theory and the starting point? If not, there is no further discussion.
I do agree with Jason, there are those that do join to understand, so having a test is a poor idea. I arrived here because I had tried my hand at YT. Being here has been a learning experience. So sometimes allowing multiple threads and having the patience of those venerated by the Catholic church provides those learning opportunities.
Would limiting new users to the number of responses they can make per day or restrict them to a pre-prepared thread based on the original claims be a way forward?
Larger font would be better, as my eyesight is getting poorer too.
