A few simple questions for conspiracy theorists

[raven]

But we have gone.

[gillianren]

And yes, it was one of the best Star Trek films. Even if William Shatner says he can't tell who Tim Allen's character was supposed to represent.

Shatner is . . . special.

[RAF]

Shatner is . . . special.

Shatner is . . . Shatner.

[Peter B]

Shatner is . . . special.

Shatner is . . . Shatner.

Well, he provides an accurate answer (sort of) to the question: Have we gone to the Moon or not? Gone? Or not gone?

(Okay, you have to use your imagination with the accent...)

[Noldi400]

And yes, it was one of the best Star Trek films. Even if William Shatner says he can't tell who Tim Allen's character was supposed to represent.

Shatner is . . . special.

As in what used to be called "Special Education?"

[Noldi400]

Here's a question for the HBs to ponder:

Let's say that you're a member of the National Guard.  You are called up to active duty and deployed to, say, Afghanistan. Six months later you return home.  One or two of your neighbors, for whatever reason, express doubt that you were in Afghanistan or that you were even called up at all.  They contend that you could have been in another city or, for that matter, holed up in a motel across town. You just claim to have been called up to increase your "heroism" quotient, maybe to impress the ladies a bit.  Photos published in the local newspaper of you deployed with your unit make no impression - they could easily have been faked.

Now here's the question. How seriously are you going to take these people?  Are you going to put a lot of effort into convincing them, or are you basically going to shrug them off as self-deluded?

Do you see the comparison I'm making?  It's easy to say, well, it could have been this, or it could have been that, but speculating about what could possibly maybe perchance theoretically have happened doesn't make it so, or even likely.

Come see us when you have some actual credible evidence that so-and-so happened, not that it might have happened.  If you have something solid, I guarantee you we'll listen.

[Rob260259]

Here's a question for the HBs to ponder:

Let's say that you're a member of the National Guard.  You are called up to active duty and deployed to, say, Afghanistan. Six months later you return home.  One or two of your neighbors, for whatever reason, express doubt that you were in Afghanistan or that you were even called up at all.  They contend that you could have been in another city or, for that matter, holed up in a motel across town. You just claim to have been called up to increase your "heroism" quotient, maybe to impress the ladies a bit.  Photos published in the local newspaper of you deployed with your unit make no impression - they could easily have been faked.

Now here's the question. How seriously are you going to take these people?  Are you going to put a lot of effort into convincing them, or are you basically going to shrug them off as self-deluded?

Do you see the comparison I'm making?  It's easy to say, well, it could have been this, or it could have been that, but speculating about what could possibly maybe perchance theoretically have happened doesn't make it so, or even likely.

Come see us when you have some actual credible evidence that so-and-so happened, not that it might have happened.  If you have something solid, I guarantee you we'll listen.

Well said. Good question, too. Imagine you would risk your life as a test pilot, i a tiny capsule mounted on top of a ICBM and some hoaxer like Bart Sibrel came along and said you faked it all. I think I would punch him twice.

[Believer]

I've got a few simple questions for those of you who consider yourselves "conspiracy theorists", "truthers", or "hoax believers".

Why do people, like you, feel the need to lie to make your case? Why do you pretend to be engineers, scientists, or doctors when you very clearly are not? Why do you create multiple sockpuppet accounts in order to give us the impression that people actually agree with you? Why do you take information out of context to make it look like it supports you? Why do you misrepresent images from movies like "Capricorn One" as "real fake" pictures? Why do you keep making the same claims even after they have been debunked?

I guess all of that can be summed up with just one question:

Why are you so dishonest?

If you have the facts on your side you don't need to lie. Something to think about.

Ah, a great question. Glad you ask. I have many answers on your question (and the rest), but the triggering event is your hopefully true interest in the following:

I am a believer in the Hoax theorie, and I will not lie. I may not answer, but I promise you I will not lie.

Now I have a question for you, how can you assume that everybody not believing in the Apollo myth is lying, where does that come from, is that your experience, or are you just poking around to generate some turmoil?

[Jason Thompson]

I may not answer, but I promise you I will not lie.

A lie of omission is still a lie. Avoiding answering a question is still dishonest.

Now I have a question for you, how can you assume that everybody not believing in the Apollo myth is lying, where does that come from, is that your experience, or are you just poking around to generate some turmoil?

I've been contributing to this forum and its predecessor for over a decade now. I can assure you, this question about dishonesty arises out of experience. Do they all lie? No. Do most of them lie, dissemble, obfuscate? Yes, most defintely. Just read some of the longest threads on this forum for examples.

[Believer]

Thanks LO.

Along those lines, I'd like to ask a question that was moved to the Abandon All Hope forum at JREF when I asked it of PK1000:  why are you, the hoax believer, so emotionally invested in proving that we didn't go to the moon?  Why won't you accept reasonable explanations from reasonable people that it happened? 

As I said then, it's OK to disagree with the program, the money and effort spent and so on.  But going to nearly the same effort to fit the Apollo record into a hoax theory as it does to make a geocentric model of the Solar system fit observations just makes no sense...

Well, interesting, I would ask the same from the debunkers, why do all this effort in making sites, attacking the disbelievers etc. etc. I really cannot imagine people doing that, other than those paid to do it.

I like to look at the subject as a historical and cultural exponent of totalitary imperialism at its best. How do States get people to believe and see what the State wants them to believe. How do you get people to abondon reasonable thinking, how do you control the information they get, how do you brainwash the small amount of people you need to manipulate the rest.

And endless source of interest I may say, where I look at a couple of times a year.

But how do you do to manage to not see this, right before your eyes, maybe participating in it, how do you manage to explain this to yourself?

I wonder, I really wonder...

[Andromeda]

Well, interesting, I would ask the same from the debunkers, why do all this effort in making sites, attacking the disbelievers etc. etc.

Because we find the Apollo missions interesting and amazing and like talking about them.  If discussing the historical facts and examining the engineering technology is "attacking" in your world, then I don't know what to tell you.  We do not attack - we defend against libellous and slanderous claims, we point out the errors and deliberate misinformation.

I really cannot imagine people doing that, other than those paid to do it.

What you can or cannot imagine has no bearing on fact.  By your logic, no-one would ever have a hobby because they weren't being paid for it.  Learning about Apollo is one of my hobbies.

I like to look at the subject as a historical and cultural exponent of totalitary imperialism at its best. How do States get people to believe and see what the State wants them to believe. How do you get people to abondon reasonable thinking, how do you control the information they get, how do you brainwash the small amount of people you need to manipulate the rest.

But how do you do to manage to not see this, right before your eyes, maybe participating in it, how do you manage to explain this to yourself?

I wonder, I really wonder...

I am not paranoid, I do not see the "brainwashing" etc that you claim simply because it isn't there.  I have plenty of scientific and historical knowledge, as well as logic and critical thinking skills, to examine the evidence and conclude that Apollo happened as presented in the historical record.

I note that you have presented no evidence, nor shown how you have drawn your "conclusions".  All you have done is launch insults.

And endless source of interest I may say, where I look at a couple of times a year.

Using your worldview as discussed above, I could claim that you are being paid to spread such claims... 

[Jason Thompson]

Well, interesting, I would ask the same from the debunkers, why do all this effort in making sites, attacking the disbelievers etc. etc.

It is not attacking disbelievers to point out where their logic is flawed; where they clearly have not understood the technical details correctly; or where they are simply lying or defaming people without justification. We make these sites because Apollo is not an intuitive subject. The details are not well known or well understood, and it is easy for people with ulterior motives (and yes, many of the more well-known hoax believers DO have ulterior motives) to hoodwink others by making it appear they know what they are talking about when in fact they do not or are simply lying. We make these sites because the only way to stop the spread of this level of ignorance is to do so. All that is required for people like Bart Sibrel to spread their crap far and wide uncritically and have it accepted by all who read it is to remain silent and let it go unchallenged. i will not do that.

I really cannot imagine people doing that, other than those paid to do it.

Well that's a failure of your imagination, not our problem.

I like to look at the subject as a historical and cultural exponent of totalitary imperialism at its best.

Again, your problem. First and foremost it is a matter of technical and historical record.

How do States get people to believe and see what the State wants them to believe. How do you get people to abondon reasonable thinking, how do you control the information they get, how do you brainwash the small amount of people you need to manipulate the rest.

And before doing any of that it is prudent to find out IF they are doing it. What you are suggesting is like trying to discuss the motive and method of a murder case without actually checking to see if the supposed victim was actually dead.

But how do you do to manage to not see this, right before your eyes, maybe participating in it, how do you manage to explain this to yourself?

By making sense of the technical aspects of it and realising that not one hoax believer in four decades or more has been able to come up with any remotely consistent scenario for how it was faked. Certainly nothing that undermines the sheer scale of the evidence that Apollo actually happened.

[frenat]

Well, interesting, I would ask the same from the debunkers, why do all this effort in making sites, attacking the disbelievers etc. etc. I really cannot imagine people doing that, other than those paid to do it.

Wow.  Didn't take you long to pull the shill card.  How very sad for you.   

How dare people post about what they are interested in and try to fight the ignorance that others spread.  The Monsters!!   

[Echnaton]

Well, interesting, I would ask the same from the debunkers, why do all this effort in making sites, attacking the disbelievers etc. etc. I really cannot imagine people doing that, other than those paid to do it.

A lack of imagination and creative thought is the most common failing of hoax believers.  You should consider spending the time to do something about that. 

[Mag40]

Well, interesting, I would ask the same from the debunkers, why do all this effort in making sites, attacking the disbelievers etc. etc. I really cannot imagine people doing that, other than those paid to do it.

Oh the irony of that statement. The ones making money on this subject are those that have nonsense books, films, blogs with adverts on and sites with paypal donations to "help with research".

Meh!

I wonder, I really wonder...

So do I. How in heavens name can anybody persist with this gibberish when every single claim has been shot down in flames a hundred times.