They faked the first one

[Glom]

I was just thinking about this (because I'm bored). I've heard it a couple of times from the more casual HB.

It is of course particularly incoherent. Such an HB is basically saying that NASA had the capability to accomplish a moonlanding four months after the one they allegedly faked yet they still faked the first one anyway. For what purpose?

What's fun about this is the insight into this particular subspecies of HB.  As I said, I've heard this from the more casual ones. Not only do they lack the motivation to dive too much into the deep end, but they also lack the bottomless stupidity too. Deep down they know the conspiracy theory is ridiculous but they also desire to believe it because it gels with their worldview, turning the great achievement into something sinister. They somehow think the stupidity is related to amount of hoarding they are alleging so this compromise means they get to be less stupid while still keeping their helping of juicy story.

[AtomicDog]

Yeah. Even Apollo 12 kept the "before the decade is out" promise, so they can't use that as an excuse.

[Andromeda]

I've also heard HBs claim that the missions were real but the pictures were faked.

 

[LunarOrbit]

They are probably just unaware that Apollo 12 also happened in 1969. I doubt they put a whole lot of thought into their theory.

[Luke Pemberton]

I've also heard HBs claim that the missions were real but the pictures were faked.

Did one of the more prominent HBs take that line eventually? If I recall it was either David Percy or Marcus Allen, but I might be wrong.

This particular line of logic reminds me of the Mitchell and Webb sketch.

I never get bored of this sketch, simply in the way it mocks the incoherency of their ever expanding polytheory.

[Glom]

I've also heard HBs claim that the missions were real but the pictures were faked.

 

Some of that is in the context of covering up aliens, but some is just a lazy attempt to have cake and eat it too as above.

[Andromeda]

[raven]

Besides Apollo 12 also fulfilling the goal, just what was there left to test after Apollo 10? Aside from the unmanned flights that tested the CSM, Saturn V and LM, the previous manned flights did the same, with Apollo 10 doing literally everything but land, even being intentionally short fuelled so the astronauts couldn't get any funny ideas. The only thing to test fully was the actual landing, which you can't do without, well, landing.

[Luke Pemberton]

Besides Apollo 12 also fulfilling the goal, just what was there left to test after Apollo 10?

Driving a rover on the surface of the moon?

...with Apollo 10 doing literally everything but land...

They were all very brave men, but I think out of all the acts this ranks in my mind as being exceptionally brave.

[ka9q]

Besides Apollo 12 also fulfilling the goal, just what was there left to test after Apollo 10?

There was plenty more to test even after the first landing. For example, Apollo 11 overshot its landing spot by quite a bit, so Apollo 12 was intended to show that a precision landing was possible. Each landing extended the stay time of the one before and did quite a bit more surface exploration.

Regarding the short-fueling of the Apollo 10 LM, Gene Cernan likes to joke that it was to keep them from getting any ideas about being the first men on the moon, but the real reason was far more prosaic. The LM was still overweight, and since Snoopy didn't have to land on the moon it could be short-fueled to make up for its excess weight and still carry out a complete lunar orbital flight test.

[raven]

More to test to meet Kennedy's goal is what I meant, guys and gals.

[Zakalwe]

Besides Apollo 12 also fulfilling the goal, just what was there left to test after Apollo 10?

There was plenty more to test even after the first landing. For example, Apollo 11 overshot its landing spot by quite a bit, so Apollo 12 was intended to show that a precision landing was possible. Each landing extended the stay time of the one before and did quite a bit more surface exploration.

Regarding the short-fueling of the Apollo 10 LM, Gene Cernan likes to joke that it was to keep them from getting any ideas about being the first men on the moon, but the real reason was far more prosaic. The LM was still overweight, and since Snoopy didn't have to land on the moon it could be short-fueled to make up for its excess weight and still carry out a complete lunar orbital flight test.

I'm sure that I also read somewhere that the Luminary software in the LM didn't have the full complement of landing software.

[ka9q]

Quite possible, since the software was being worked on right up to the last moment, or close to it.

Just like every software project since.