NASA has presented literally tons of evidence that they went. I've evaluated what my specific educational level and direction permits me to evaluate (it's more than you might think), and it holds up. People actually educated in other relevant fields have evaluated what they can, and they have universally said it holds up.
It holds up very well, and its techniques are still being taught to engineers today.
But technical details aside, when tarkus wields Occam's Razor, he's holding it by the wrong end. Occam's Razor is an explicit framework for comparing
two hypotheses. It cannot be used simply to disregard or discredit a single hypothesis in isolation. Tarkus implies the other hypothesis is that Apollo 13 (and the other missions) were hoaxes. Laying aside all the superstition and cabalistic handwaving, Occam's Razor clearly prunes the hoax hypothesis. Occam requires two hypotheses with equal ability to explain the outcome. The one that does so by the least appeal to conjecture or untestable claims is deemed the most parsimonious.
Smartcooky has given us an excellent list of the kinds of questions that would need to be answered before the hoax hypothesis can be said not to be purely conjectural. However tarkus misunderstand's William of Occam's intent entirely. Tarkus tells us that the Razor prunes Apollo 13 (on flimsy superstitious and dubious statistical grounds), but then insinuates the hoax hypothesis then stands by default. That's not at all how Occam's Razor works.
