Comments on: Moon Hoax Believers http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/ I am an astronomer, writer, and skeptic. I likes reality the way it is, and I aims to keep it that way. My real name is Phil Plait, and I run the Bad Astronomy blog. Tue, 14 Feb 2012 13:14:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: IVAN3MAN http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-2/#comment-174137 IVAN3MAN Tue, 14 Apr 2009 06:02:30 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-174137 <a target="_blank" title="ImageShack - Image And Video Hosting" href="http://img440.imageshack.us/my.php?image=trollalert.gif" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/1764/trollalert.gif" border='0'/></a>

]]> By: Thoth http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-174136 Thoth Tue, 14 Apr 2009 06:00:30 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-174136 If these arguments are to progress beyond ignorance, NASA and debunkers should acknowledge that to be skeptical of the Apollo Manned Moon Missions is not unintelligent, illogical, unscientific, or unreasonable. Many skeptics do a lot of reserach. Of course there is a lot of ignorance out there. NASA is responsible for much of it. Many Americans don't even realize that the Space Shuttle only travels about 150 miles into space. But every elementary school student in the U.S. is thoroughly instructed about the Apollo Manned Moon Missions, even though there is no proof (zero) some 40 years later, and while there is a mountain of NASA manufactured evidence, the quality of that evidence is lacking. I watched the first Manned Moon Landing on television when I was 8. After 20 years of observation using superior sensory technology, I became very skeptical. Another 20 years later, having reviewed thousands of pages of so called scientific evidence, it is clear that at least some portions of the Manned Moon Missions were simulated. I read a lot of the hoax and hoax debunker blogs. NASA is a highly skilled propaganda machine. But they often fail to even consider valid hoax arguments. They distract, sidestep, focus on invalid or ignorant arguments, even stoop to name calling. If a child asked me to prove that I personally made a toy, it would not matter if the child mispronounced a word or wasn't previously familiar with a particular tool I used. For me to call the child stupid or crazy, or avoid the child's legitimate request does not make me more intelligent ... nor does it in any way indicate that the child is not a critical thinker. Regardless of the TRUTH ... NASA is responsible for continued widespread ignorance and for failing to provide quality evidence and adequate proof of an outrageous claim. 100% propaganda and 0% evidence usually is a strong indicator that somethging isn't true. If NASA would turn off the propaganda machine, and seriously answer valid questions, we could make some progress. If these arguments are to progress beyond ignorance, NASA and debunkers should acknowledge that to be skeptical of the Apollo Manned Moon Missions is not unintelligent, illogical, unscientific, or unreasonable. Many skeptics do a lot of reserach. Of course there is a lot of ignorance out there. NASA is responsible for much of it. Many Americans don’t even realize that the Space Shuttle only travels about 150 miles into space. But every elementary school student in the U.S. is thoroughly instructed about the Apollo Manned Moon Missions, even though there is no proof (zero) some 40 years later, and while there is a mountain of NASA manufactured evidence, the quality of that evidence is lacking. I watched the first Manned Moon Landing on television when I was 8. After 20 years of observation using superior sensory technology, I became very skeptical. Another 20 years later, having reviewed thousands of pages of so called scientific evidence, it is clear that at least some portions of the Manned Moon Missions were simulated. I read a lot of the hoax and hoax debunker blogs. NASA is a highly skilled propaganda machine. But they often fail to even consider valid hoax arguments. They distract, sidestep, focus on invalid or ignorant arguments, even stoop to name calling. If a child asked me to prove that I personally made a toy, it would not matter if the child mispronounced a word or wasn’t previously familiar with a particular tool I used. For me to call the child stupid or crazy, or avoid the child’s legitimate request does not make me more intelligent … nor does it in any way indicate that the child is not a critical thinker. Regardless of the TRUTH … NASA is responsible for continued widespread ignorance and for failing to provide quality evidence and adequate proof of an outrageous claim. 100% propaganda and 0% evidence usually is a strong indicator that somethging isn’t true. If NASA would turn off the propaganda machine, and seriously answer valid questions, we could make some progress.

]]> By: mountainvoyager http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26512 mountainvoyager Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:20:46 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26512 Here in Scotland. I am surrounded by hoax believers, since there was recently a documentary on t.v. no one can recall the name of show...so I'm not sure if its the fox one...I haven't seen any of them myself.... but it was all the works, flag waving, no stars, people being murdered, intense heat, which I assume to be van allen belts, some of these people are so convinced of these hoaxes...but I reckon its as my main man the humanitarian Peter Gabriel says'' You are what you watch'' ....but to do so blindly is folly..and dangerous...just look what they got way with doing in Iraq..after misleading..if not down right lying to the us. and uk people ps the footage of astronaut getting help up off the ground was difficult to argue against with its seeming wee glitch...over use of footage I said...help on this one Here in Scotland. I am surrounded by hoax believers, since there was recently a documentary on t.v. no one can recall the name of show…so I’m not sure if its the fox one…I haven’t seen any of them myself….
but it was all the works, flag waving, no stars, people being murdered, intense heat, which I assume to be van allen belts, some of these people are so convinced of these hoaxes…but I reckon its as my main man the humanitarian Peter Gabriel says” You are what you watch” ….but to do so blindly is folly..and dangerous…just look what they got way with doing in Iraq..after misleading..if not down right lying to the us. and uk people

ps the footage of astronaut getting help up off the ground was difficult to argue against with its seeming wee glitch…over use of footage I said…help on this one

]]> By: Shmoo http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26511 Shmoo Tue, 09 Oct 2007 20:06:11 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26511 In fact, there is no MOON! In fact, there is no MOON!

]]> By: Mark Martin http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26510 Mark Martin Sun, 31 Dec 2006 21:16:50 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26510 I also have to laugh (hard) when reading this part specifically: "Another problem that I didn’t include is that sometimes you see the side of the astronaut not facing the sun and it is visible, not completely dark like it should be. With only one bright light source that shouldn’t happen,..." They never seem to grasp the implication of this claim. If the shaded side of the astronaut is pitch black, it means that no light is entering the astronaut's eyes. An astronaut in the shade should, according to Hoax proponents, be bat-blind. That first A-11 photo cited by MLPSceptic is pointing directly away from the Sun. Why doesn't MLP argue that the very landscape ought to be unseeable, just nothing but blackness? Doesn't he realize the difference between the soil and the sky, which is in fact perfectly black? Hoax proponents are just plain stupid, not because they question the conventional wisdom, but because they only take their arguments just far enough to assure themselves that the hoax is real- but no further. I also have to laugh (hard) when reading this part specifically:

“Another problem that I didn’t include is that sometimes you see the side of the astronaut not facing the sun and it is visible, not completely dark like it should be. With only one bright light source that shouldn’t happen,…”

They never seem to grasp the implication of this claim. If the shaded side of the astronaut is pitch black, it means that no light is entering the astronaut’s eyes. An astronaut in the shade should, according to Hoax proponents, be bat-blind. That first A-11 photo cited by MLPSceptic is pointing directly away from the Sun. Why doesn’t MLP argue that the very landscape ought to be unseeable, just nothing but blackness? Doesn’t he realize the difference between the soil and the sky, which is in fact perfectly black?

Hoax proponents are just plain stupid, not because they question the conventional wisdom, but because they only take their arguments just far enough to assure themselves that the hoax is real- but no further.

]]> By: DJ http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26509 DJ Sun, 31 Dec 2006 17:41:40 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26509 <i>"Another problem that I didn’t include is that sometimes you see the side of the astronaut not facing the sun and it is visible, not completely dark like it should be. With only one bright light source that shouldn’t happen, <b>and with the curvature of the surface there should be no light reflecting back</b>"</i> That's just my favorite part of MLPSceptic's post. :-) How big does this mensa think the moon actually is, about the size of a football field? “Another problem that I didn’t include is that sometimes you see the side of the astronaut not facing the sun and it is visible, not completely dark like it should be. With only one bright light source that shouldn’t happen, and with the curvature of the surface there should be no light reflecting back“

That’s just my favorite part of MLPSceptic’s post. :-)

How big does this mensa think the moon actually is, about the size of a football field?

]]> By: Bob ~I watched it at the time~ http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26508 Bob ~I watched it at the time~ Sat, 30 Dec 2006 20:45:53 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26508 Anyone old enough to remember the landings KNOWS they went. The Russians would have given anything to have the chance to put one over the Americans. If you knew the world situation at the time you would have no doubt at all. I'm a Brit and not all that keen on the USA & GWB at the moment, but I know they went. Don't forget the Russians got unmanned probes there years before the USA, so were perfectly capable of tracking the missions, and boy, would they have been shouting 'Foul' given the slightest hint of anything dodgy. Ye gods, I don't even know why I'm bothering to argue with them, they've probably all been abducted and taken to Venus by friendly aliens, so they can't be wrong. Anyone old enough to remember the landings KNOWS they went. The Russians would have given anything to have the chance to put one over the Americans. If you knew the world situation at the time you would have no doubt at all. I’m a Brit and not all that keen on the USA & GWB at the moment, but I know they went. Don’t forget the Russians got unmanned probes there years before the USA, so were perfectly capable of tracking the missions, and boy, would they have been shouting ‘Foul’ given the slightest hint of anything dodgy. Ye gods, I don’t even know why I’m bothering to argue with them, they’ve probably all been abducted and taken to Venus by friendly aliens, so they can’t be wrong.

]]> By: Sticks http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26507 Sticks Fri, 29 Dec 2006 12:43:16 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26507 Incidentally one of my favourite films is "The Dish" which showed other countries were tracking Apollo 11. Were they all fooled. Sorry I forget the Russians who acknowledged the feat were paid to do so with Wheat :rolleyes: Sheesh!!!! Incidentally one of my favourite films is “The Dish” which showed other countries were tracking Apollo 11. Were they all fooled. Sorry I forget the Russians who acknowledged the feat were paid to do so with Wheat :rolleyes:

Sheesh!!!!

]]> By: Ticklemonster http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26506 Ticklemonster Fri, 29 Dec 2006 12:41:07 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26506 Well heck, just hook up a chain to it, and tow it a little closer with a shuttle then!!! :) OH well. (not like I have read every page here) Well heck, just hook up a chain to it, and tow it a little closer with a shuttle then!!! :)

OH well. (not like I have read every page here)

]]> By: Jack Hagerty http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26505 Jack Hagerty Fri, 29 Dec 2006 09:59:23 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26505 Ticklemonster Says: "So let me aks you all a qurestion: why don’t they turn the hubble towards Tranquility base and just get some snapshots of the LM base and all that and get it over with?" As has been mentioned here before, as spectacular as the resolution of the Hubble is, it's still about 10X shy of being able to resolve something as small as the LM base. Remember that the moon is still a quarter million miles away from the Hubble. - Jack Ticklemonster Says: “So let me aks you all a qurestion: why don’t they turn the hubble towards Tranquility base and just get some snapshots of the LM base and all that and get it over with?”

As has been mentioned here before, as spectacular as the resolution of the Hubble is, it’s still about 10X shy of being able to resolve something as small as the LM base. Remember that the moon is still a quarter million miles away from the Hubble.

- Jack

]]> By: Ticklemonster http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26504 Ticklemonster Fri, 29 Dec 2006 08:17:32 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26504 I was at Titusville when Apollo 11 took off, and got to see it, albeit that was a good distance away, but it was still awesome. I remember sitting on the sofa upside down when the first video images were shown on tv. So let me aks you all a qurestion: why don't they turn the hubble towards Tranquility base and just get some snapshots of the LM base and all that and get it over with? I was at Titusville when Apollo 11 took off, and got to see it, albeit that was a good distance away, but it was still awesome. I remember sitting on the sofa upside down when the first video images were shown on tv.

So let me aks you all a qurestion: why don’t they turn the hubble towards Tranquility base and just get some snapshots of the LM base and all that and get it over with?

]]> By: The Bad Astronomer http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26503 The Bad Astronomer Fri, 29 Dec 2006 03:21:35 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26503 I think we have a troll here; Mick Mus mentions a redbull commercial? C'mon. I think we have a troll here; Mick Mus mentions a redbull commercial? C’mon.

]]> By: Irishman http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26502 Irishman Fri, 29 Dec 2006 02:42:35 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26502 Mick Mus, you're making an idiot of yourself. The Bad Astronomer posted a link <b> <i>in this thread</i> </b> to pages that answer the very questions about how come the lunar lander is visible when the camera is looking at the shadowed side, how come the pictures are clear, and how come the reseau grid (cross marks) are obscured by objects in the pictures (i.e. look like they are behind the objects). It would be one thing if we hadn't already pointed this out, but since we have and you have failed to look at the evidence, that pretty much shows your level of credibility. Here are a couple of specific links addressing these and several other photo claims, complete with example pictures. http://www.iangoddard.net/moon01.htm http://www.clavius.org/photoret.html Mick Mus, you’re making an idiot of yourself. The Bad Astronomer posted a link in this thread to pages that answer the very questions about how come the lunar lander is visible when the camera is looking at the shadowed side, how come the pictures are clear, and how come the reseau grid (cross marks) are obscured by objects in the pictures (i.e. look like they are behind the objects). It would be one thing if we hadn’t already pointed this out, but since we have and you have failed to look at the evidence, that pretty much shows your level of credibility.

Here are a couple of specific links addressing these and several other photo claims, complete with example pictures.
http://www.iangoddard.net/moon01.htm
http://www.clavius.org/photoret.html

]]> By: Mick Mus http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26501 Mick Mus Fri, 29 Dec 2006 02:02:33 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26501 Everyone knows that the photos were faked. Its even in those redbull commercials. How can the lunar thingy be so clear if the sun was behind it? The cross markes are even well into images like they was photo shopped or something. As a kid in florida I saw the night apolla launch. It seemed to be quite small and go out of sight really fast and then they said they were on their way to the moon, but we really knows the truth. Everyone knows that the photos were faked. Its even in those redbull commercials. How can the lunar thingy be so clear if the sun was behind it? The cross markes are even well into images like they was photo shopped or something. As a kid in florida I saw the night apolla launch. It seemed to be quite small and go out of sight really fast and then they said they were on their way to the moon, but we really knows the truth.

]]> By: Mark Martin http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26500 Mark Martin Thu, 28 Dec 2006 21:07:28 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26500 I notice that Barnes & Noble likes to take books from categories {c,d,f} and plant them in categories {m,n,o}. I notice that Barnes & Noble likes to take books from categories {c,d,f} and plant them in categories {m,n,o}.

]]> By: Richard B. Drumm http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26499 Richard B. Drumm Thu, 28 Dec 2006 15:57:02 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26499 Phil: In Charlottesville's Barnes & (Ig)Noble I found a moon hoax book about 6" away from your Bad Astronomy book in the astronomy section. Sooooo.... I took it over to the mythology section where it belonged! :-) Score one small one for reality... B&N staff will probably put it back, though. Richard B. Drumm Former UVa Parallax Program Observer Vice President, CAS (Charlottesville Astronomical Society) Phil:
In Charlottesville’s Barnes & (Ig)Noble I found a moon hoax book about 6″ away from your Bad Astronomy book in the astronomy section.
Sooooo….
I took it over to the mythology section where it belonged! :-)
Score one small one for reality… B&N staff will probably put it back, though.
Richard B. Drumm
Former UVa Parallax Program Observer
Vice President, CAS (Charlottesville Astronomical Society)

]]> By: Mark Martin http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26498 Mark Martin Thu, 28 Dec 2006 15:39:16 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26498 Yes, but it's not enough to just cite examples of official lies on the part of specific government individuals. Conspiracies sometimes happen, but when a conspiracy theorist cries out, it's possible to ask if the alleged conspiracy is within the domain of possibility. It's quite possible to lie to the public just long enough to get a war going. It's another order of magnitude to claim that an administration decades long-gone erected a falsehood -the Apollo Hoax- which must be maintained by future generations of liars, indefinitely, regardless the cost, even if that cost may far exceed that of actually placing some people on the Moon. The "Government" is an entity of quite finite resources, and is far from capable of doing absolutely any arbitrary agenda at will. Yes, but it’s not enough to just cite examples of official lies on the part of specific government individuals. Conspiracies sometimes happen, but when a conspiracy theorist cries out, it’s possible to ask if the alleged conspiracy is within the domain of possibility. It’s quite possible to lie to the public just long enough to get a war going. It’s another order of magnitude to claim that an administration decades long-gone erected a falsehood -the Apollo Hoax- which must be maintained by future generations of liars, indefinitely, regardless the cost, even if that cost may far exceed that of actually placing some people on the Moon.

The “Government” is an entity of quite finite resources, and is far from capable of doing absolutely any arbitrary agenda at will.

]]> By: Sticks http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26497 Sticks Thu, 28 Dec 2006 12:30:54 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26497 I suspect that the HBs are winning, and the best tactic they have is poison root wrt the Iraqi conflict The claim is that the evil American Gubment lied about WMDs that that great philanthropist Saddam Husain had so they could get his oil and GW could right a family dishonour against his dear old Pa. This means the evil American Gubment lied about the Apollo hoax and were not above murder (Apollo 1) to cover things up. <i>or the record - My take on Iraq is that either Saddam miscalculated and thought if people thought he had wmds they would not attack him or their construction was subcontracted to Syria to get around the weapons inspectors</i> Any hue, America has a credibility gap into which the HB's have been piling in I suspect that the HBs are winning, and the best tactic they have is poison root wrt the Iraqi conflict

The claim is that the evil American Gubment lied about WMDs that that great philanthropist Saddam Husain had so they could get his oil and GW could right a family dishonour against his dear old Pa. This means the evil American Gubment lied about the Apollo hoax and were not above murder (Apollo 1) to cover things up.

or the record – My take on Iraq is that either Saddam miscalculated and thought if people thought he had wmds they would not attack him or their construction was subcontracted to Syria to get around the weapons inspectors

Any hue, America has a credibility gap into which the HB’s have been piling in

]]> By: Mark Martin http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26496 Mark Martin Thu, 28 Dec 2006 03:47:40 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26496 British or not, it still remains that five minutes of research on the internet would yield an account of the availability of color TV in the U.S. back to the 1950s. This exemplifies the whole modus operandi of the Hoax proponents; they don't do research. But you're right. When grown adults cannot even grasp the role of punctuation, their strategy for choosing a worldview may lack some essentials. British or not, it still remains that five minutes of research on the internet would yield an account of the availability of color TV in the U.S. back to the 1950s. This exemplifies the whole modus operandi of the Hoax proponents; they don’t do research.

But you’re right. When grown adults cannot even grasp the role of punctuation, their strategy for choosing a worldview may lack some essentials.

]]> By: bassmanpete http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26495 bassmanpete Thu, 28 Dec 2006 02:38:41 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26495 Mark, I wouldn't be surprised if that idea's coming out of the UK. At the end of 1969 there were only about 200,000 colour TV sets in Britain so colour broadcasts weren't available to the majority of the population until the '70s. As for the HBs, I'm pretty sure a lot of them don't believe the hoaxes they just want to get a reaction, in other words they're stirring. And the 'true believers', well, if they can spend 10 years or more at school and not be able to spell nor put a sentence together in a comprehensible form, how can they be expected to understand Phil's excellent debunking of all the Moon Landing Conspiracy "facts"? Mark, I wouldn’t be surprised if that idea’s coming out of the UK. At the end of 1969 there were only about 200,000 colour TV sets in Britain so colour broadcasts weren’t available to the majority of the population until the ’70s.

As for the HBs, I’m pretty sure a lot of them don’t believe the hoaxes they just want to get a reaction, in other words they’re stirring. And the ‘true believers’, well, if they can spend 10 years or more at school and not be able to spell nor put a sentence together in a comprehensible form, how can they be expected to understand Phil’s excellent debunking of all the Moon Landing Conspiracy “facts”?

]]> By: Zoot http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26465 Zoot Thu, 28 Dec 2006 02:36:21 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26465 Or, that the computers at the time were special purpose electro-mechanical devices rather than general purpose digital electronic devices like we have today. Building a device that solves a fixed set of math problems is a very different thing than building a universal calculator. I suppose some may start denying WW2 all together soon, but the devices built for code breaking and trajectory calculations back then are sort of a case in point. Or, that the computers at the time were special purpose electro-mechanical devices rather than general purpose digital electronic devices like we have today. Building a device that solves a fixed set of math problems is a very different thing than building a universal calculator.

I suppose some may start denying WW2 all together soon, but the devices built for code breaking and trajectory calculations back then are sort of a case in point.

]]> By: Bryan D. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26494 Bryan D. Thu, 28 Dec 2006 00:25:14 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26494 Ha, I've seen that "no colour TVs" thing as well, funny stuff. It reminds me of the "Apollo couldn't even run a calculator" stuff thats tossed around from time to time, I guess based on the assumption that without computers science is impossible. Ha, I’ve seen that “no colour TVs” thing as well, funny stuff. It reminds me of the “Apollo couldn’t even run a calculator” stuff thats tossed around from time to time, I guess based on the assumption that without computers science is impossible.

]]> By: Mark Martin http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26493 Mark Martin Wed, 27 Dec 2006 22:55:13 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26493 A new twist that's started to show up lately is claims that "color TV wasn't even available in the 1960s." This is an incredible demonstration of ignorance. I've encountered this particular argument at least three different time within the past couple of months. It's just more of the same-old-same-old: they don't do research. A new twist that’s started to show up lately is claims that “color TV wasn’t even available in the 1960s.” This is an incredible demonstration of ignorance. I’ve encountered this particular argument at least three different time within the past couple of months. It’s just more of the same-old-same-old: they don’t do research.

]]> By: Bryan D. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26492 Bryan D. Wed, 27 Dec 2006 22:48:31 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26492 I'm reminded of another Simpsons quote! "I'm like that guy who single-handedly built the rocket and flew to the moon! What was his name? Apollo Creed?" :) I’m reminded of another Simpsons quote!

“I’m like that guy who single-handedly built the rocket and flew to the moon! What was his name? Apollo Creed?”
:)

]]> By: The Science Pundit http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/comment-page-1/#comment-26491 The Science Pundit Wed, 27 Dec 2006 21:35:54 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/26/moon-hoax-believers/#comment-26491 You can tell Lance Armstrong to his face, but watch out what you say to Buzz Lightyear. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcoyiJdeWT4" rel="nofollow">Aldrin punches out Sibrel.</a> (just in case the above link doesn't work, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcoyiJdeWT4) You can tell Lance Armstrong to his face, but watch out what you say to Buzz Lightyear.

Aldrin punches out Sibrel.

(just in case the above link doesn’t work,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcoyiJdeWT4)

]]>