What do you say to people who think the moon landing was faked?

What do you say to people who think the moon landing was faked?

Other urls found in this thread:

google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=high resolution pictures of moon landing sites
skyandtelescope.com/observing/how-to-see-all-six-apollo-moon-landing-sites/
youtube.com/watch?v=P6MOnehCOUw
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploration_of_the_Moon
source.wustl.edu/2009/07/apollo-11-moon-rocks-still-crucial-40-years-later-say-wustl-researchers-2/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

"oh okay" and just leave it at that. Nothing I say will convince them anyway.

"I honestly don't give a shit about what you believe about the moon landing because it is so inconsequential to me, you, or the value you bring to society"

This. I also make mental note who says/believes this, and will avoid them for anything of consequence.

I don't really mind it. They're definitely wrong, but at least it isn't flat/hollow earth tier.

I might be a bit biased as my grandpa denied the moon landing.

How do you explain the flag waving? Didn't they say the flag shouldn't wave on the moon because no wind?

Depends. If they are hard core believers, I do what these other anons said-- disregard and move on with my life.

But somebody who is just starting down that rabbit hole might still be savable. I generally point them to "MythBusters," as an engaging and entertaining show where some of that nonsense is refuted by guys who folks who don't know much about... well, just who don't know much, let's say...tend to trust as guys who prove things.

No.You are not going to sneak a troll thread of /x/ worthy shit in here like that. Go away.

10 seconds on Google, you can find all the refutation you need of all of their nonsense.

You have no proof it happened.

You have no proof it didn't.

>How do you explain the flag waving?
In a vacuum, there is no air resistance to dampen the motions induced by the astronauts violently sticking the flag into the ground. The cloth is free to swing like a pendulum, slowing down only because of the resistance due to the fibers of the cloth itself having a slight inherent stiffness. You will notice (well no you won't, because you'll never check) that once the flag has stopped moving, it will not move again unless the flag or pole is touched again. Or when the lander takes off and the exhaust blasts the flag.

Tell them that if it was fake how did USSR not bitch and whine that they couldn't see Americans going to space anywhere.

The moon landing video and pictures are the proof. You have to provide disproof, otherwise this will never go anywhere. It won't go anywhere anyway; these conspiracy theories can never really be proven or disproven as there is and will always be a lack of required information.

If they did bitch and whine do you think America media would show this to its citizens?

>disproven as there is and will always be a lack of required information.
Horseshit. Aside from amateur radio operators tracking the communications at the time to the Soviets not crying "Shenanigans" to all the very sane and provable math, engineering, and personnel efforts at the time, even now satellites are returning images of the landing sites.
google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=high resolution pictures of moon landing sites

The hoaxers are essentially attention whores. Can't do *anything* productive themselves, so tearing down something great makes them feel like they're somehow on a par. So sad.

Yes, and so would the rest of the world. Everybody would have pounced on the chance to discredit such a lie in real time.

Just watch the Mythbusters episode my dude.

nothing

Why do you think they would not? They show everybody else bitching and whining? And they were a known business where those sympathetic to the Soviets could find employment.

Look how totally they swallowed the" We were never interested in those moon-grapes anyway, they are probably sour," line the Soviets used after losing the race -- in spite of plentiful evidence that the Russians tried very hard to get to the moon ahead of the US.

I explain to them in detail how it is possible from the perspective of someone educated in physics and aerospace engineering to such detail that they are too uneducated to possibly refute any of it from fear of proving to everyone that they don't know what they're even talking about.

That's all you have to do. Educated person > Uneducated person every time. You don't even have to convince them, just show everyone how idiotic they are.

>think the moon landing was faked
That would be "believe the moon landing..."
I think it likely happened: but crazier things have been exposed, so I'm open-minded.
But I'm not an idiot, crazy people can craft the most imaginative lies: and they believe them so they can seem very convincing. Thankfully, I'm not trump and believe the most recent nonsense he's heard or read on his twit site.

The single most convincing reason why the moon landing must have been real is that the USSR didn't challenge it's legitimacy. In fact they reported that they tracked the space ship into space. The USSR had absolutely no reason to go along with any lie like that, and in fact it would be to their benefit if they could make people think the US faked it

there are also the many independent observatories that made use of the mirror retro-reflector they left on the moons surface

This is what did it for me. Without even knowing anything about rocket science, it just seems like the USSR would raise hell if it was faked.

Plus, one of the longest running experiments has been made possible by setting up a mirrored array as one of the last things they did before returning to orbit. Lasers from Earth target the lunar landing sites, and they measure the return time to see how far the moon is, and how fast it is moving away.

Do you know that countries other than the US and the USSR existed back then? Even if the US media played along, a hundred or so other countries would have made it front page news. There is no way that it wouldn't have leaked into the US from everywhere else.

I've knocked down all of their arguments. They just wait a few months and then pretend the previous conversation never happened, going back to the same old crap about the Van Allen Belt and how air conditioning can't work in space.

...

Look at it this way comrade. If we had even halfway believable evidence that your evil capitalist government was faking it to try to get ahead of our great Soviet Union. Don't you think we would have called you on it?

Don't you think it would have been child's play for the might of the KGB to expose such a lame cover up that hicks in West Virgina figured out all out the day it happened?

Now stop asking about this nonsense. Every time you ask about this you make you propaganda character look smarter, and that is just sad.

>We have x10 better technology and resources
>Sorry we can't go back because reasons

Because budget, edgelord. Go ahead, try and write up a convincing justification.

I'd say,"Federal Reserve notes are fake." And I'd refuse the subject of the moon landing until we covered that more pressing issue.

H.R. 8469
Moon funding proposal.
Authored by Anonymous.
2/16/2017

Moon is awesome!

money to go back please

End funding resolution H.R. 8469, remaining pages are intentionally blank.
This is a non-classified public document, reprints are permitted.

If it was fake, who put the U.S. flag we saw there on the 2nd landing?

I just don't understand what's stopped us going back up there and setting up base or doing cool moon experiments. I'm sure there's plenty of cool shit to discover from fucking around on a different gravity field. Not to mention the potential for resources and Industry

>the U.S. flag we saw there on the 2nd landing?
Say wut?
skyandtelescope.com/observing/how-to-see-all-six-apollo-moon-landing-sites/

What's so difficult to understand? You've pointed out some nice reasons to go back, but what do you not understand about budget issues, science goals met, and spaceflight superiority established?

nobody reads the lunar peace treaties, or understand the back end politics

Basically everyone is so too afraid that whoever gets the moon, mars, ... they will have such a overwhelming advantage that nuclear retaliation is considered a viable alternative to another moon landing.

The result is space exploration is done at a painfully slow pace as each launch practically has its own UN investigation to show it is not some secret power grab.

We either fix things here properly (world peace and stuff), or say screw it and let one faction setup a military moon base secure orbital strike abilities for centuries to come.

You got to think like a paranoid politician to understand such complex ideas.

That hydroponic bay China plans to build, totally a bio-weapons plant out of investigation scrutiny so only they can contol the food supply.

Sending people instead of robots is reeeealllly fucking expensive and honestly, its noy worth the money compared to the science.

Especially considering how good our rovers are getting, with their onboard chemistry labs and spectrometers.

youtube.com/watch?v=P6MOnehCOUw

...aaaaand with that entry from left field, I'm going to bed.

There are many ways to roughly measure that distance and the actual measurements mean nothing in the grand scheme of things, can easily be bogus.

Trusting photographic evidence in the 21st century? Wew!

There could be very good reasons not to go as well. If they could do it with a tin can back in the 60's what's the big deal?

Wut!? lol

Anyway there are enough reasons to doubt it, mostly because of the malfeasance, disinformation and general bullshit emanating from the "superpowers" soon after WW2 ended that seemed to grow with every year right up to today - it's getting hard to believe anything "official". Psychological operations were and are a huge part of things and there would be reasons to distract the populations with a moon show.

Anywhoo, there are plenty of future missions planned with landers - rovers by various countries so perhaps it can all be laid to rest with some life feeds of the flag or what have you, or maybe finally outed as one of the greatest scientific frauds perpetrated in the 20th century!?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploration_of_the_Moon

This
Same with creationists, singularity believers and climate change deniers

I dont say anything cause those people do not exist. Its only trolling. Just like with flat earth.

welcome to enlightenment

"Yes I'd like fries with that"

Unfortunately the flat earth thing blew out of proportion. I actually met someone in his 50s and he thinks the Earth is flat. Whenever I counter his claims he just tells me to read what people wrote on the internet in more detail and I'll see that it's true. He also thinks the moon is made out of gas.

I wish I was joking.

Please stop touching my willy.

why didn't the soviet union say capitalists pigs faked it

>Trusting photographic evidence in the 21st century? Wew!
So what's your end game here? What would you need to convince you Apollo landed on the Moon six times? Are you being an obnoxious goit because you hope to be swept up in a ship and have your nose rubbed in it? Are you looking for a free ride?
Like I said,
>The hoaxers are essentially attention whores. Can't do *anything* productive themselves, so tearing down something great makes them feel like they're somehow on a par. So sad.

How can you even prove the moon exists

Yes we do. On the other hand, you have no proof that it didn't

How can you even prove ur anus exists?

Solar Wind

meme form pls

This. It's getting more and more prevalent, as we see more celebrities and big names spout off this garbage. And it's always the same 'look online...open your eyes...i can't explain it myself but i'll redirect you to a bunch of other guys who have some vague explanation..."

Doesn't it ever occur to them their behavior is as cultish as the people they denounce?

Just pointing out the photoshoop has been around far too long for NASA to start wheeling out evidence of moon tracks or whatever. That evidence is inadmissible in the court of Veeky Forums.

I guess my end game is waiting for so many rovers to be plying the moonscape returning enough video evidence, especially of the flag sitting there waving in the moon wind, to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Apollo went into orbit six times is about all I am sure of, going all the way to the bright side of the moon, landing, and returning six times without loss of life back in those days when it is unrepeatable today is suspect I think. Of course NASA is a huge authority on some matters so it is important we trust them, where there is smoke there is sometimes fire.

ALDRIN PUUUUNNCHH!

Nothing. I don't like dealing with crazy people. Sometimes I'll drop a couple of bucks into their cup though.

>Forgets to mention there's a crossbar built into the top of the flag so it will be displayed.

All that episode did was prove that it's possible to fake the whole landing on Earth.

There's lots of proof. Get yourself some telescope time and you can actually see the landing sites yourself.

>I just don't understand what's stopped us going back up there and setting up base or doing cool moon experiments.

The original push to get to the moon was a politically driven one, not driven by the sceince ir the urge to exploe. Oh, they took along experiments, and guys who wanted to explore rofe that train as long as they could, but big government contracts run on Money, and the sort of dough Apollo needed was at the leel that you only get when locked in a competition wioth a Country Full of Bad Guys.

Wghen the race was won, a project that had been sold as a race lost justification to continue. At the same time, America was up to its ass in other things to worry about -- Nixon was trashing the constitution, the Vietnam War was shredding society on a lot of levels, there were riots, the economy was #strugglin, racial issues all over the place.

The will to continue providing really huge pots of money evaporated when the race was won.

Hmmmmm... I seeee...

I would have not ben surprised of they said that anyway.

Instead what they said was, "Those moon grapes are probably sour, we never really wanted them anyway."

OMG BRO I AGREE, THE HOLOCAUST DIDNT HAPPEN EITHER!

>There are many ways to roughly measure that distance and the actual measurements mean nothing in the grand scheme of things, can easily be bogus.

This is really all you have got? The mirrors have been used multiple times in more experiments than just that one, by many different groups of researchers.

So everyone that wants to utilize the lunar mirrors are just part of the conspiracy?

You are full of it.

>to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

Already proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

> Multuiple eye witnesses saw eachother walking on the moon.
> Massive photo and video evidence that could not be faked at the time.
Real-time video broadcast from Moon seen by millions, could not be faked with technology of the time.
>Spacecraft tracked to and from moon by friendly, neutral and hostile observers.
>Competitor in race concedes defeat.
>Samples of lunar material returned, in quantities well in excess of what unmanned landers at the time could return. (A few ounces vs. hundreds of pounds.)
>Traces left on the moon filmed from lunar orbit by third party. Said traces match exactly with what the astronauts are known to have done while on the moon.
>Spacecraft in orbit (for generally 2 orbits) before leaving Earth for the moon were visible to naked eyes, then no longer visible when they went to the moon, then reentered atmosphere with hundreds of eye-witnesses without being seen in orbit in the interim.
>Burns of the third stage engine on way to moon were noted from Earth.
>Apollo 13 debris cloud visible from Earth

That'll scratch the surface sufficiently to make the point -- the evidence that they did it is overwhelming.

COULD they have faked one or two bits of it? Probably. There is zero evidence that they did, and ALL of the evidence adds up to the inescapable conclusion that they did what they said they did, and what we saw them do.

To be fair, let's look at the "evidence" that they didn't do it:
>I don't understand how...
Not my problem, learn to understand, your ignorance is not evidence.
>I just don't believe, a priori, that...
Not my problem, not evidence.
>I will now make a statement that is just not true.
Untrue statements are not evidence.

And that is literally all they have. Nothing. Zero evidence on their side.

>where there is smoke there is sometimes fire.

This would only be valid if there was, in fact any smoke.

No you can't. No terrestrial telescope can resolve any feature on the moon as small as the objects left up there. Nor can Hubble. Lunar orbiting probes can, and when the photograph the landing sites, whatayaknow? Stuff is there.

Yet eyewitnesses and unverifiable 'evidence' of UFOs is always dismissed as unreasonable. Because we are predisposed to doubt it, our definition of 'reasonable evidence' shifts.

i thought they put a reflector for laser ranging at one of the sites

They did, it has already been mentioned multiple times in this thread. It is just someone trolling and people don't know how to sage.

>put one or two hoaxers on a rocket and send it on a one way trip to the moon, all live footage big brother hardcore style, including climax
>release books about how it was all faked and it just proves the conspiracy further
>drown in hoaxer cash and pay the debts you amassed for the moon landing, while investing the rest in private moon colonization project

Tell me why it won't work, Veeky Forums.

Otherwise conspiracist would say we found aliens there.

Has anybody seen the goalposts?

Not sure where this guy moved them to?

They did, and it is possible to bounce a powerful laser off of those mirrors and detect the reflection.

That is not the same a having a telescope that can show you an image of the physical artifacts on the moon -- there is no terrestrial telescope with that resolving power. That is a limitation of terrestrial telescopes, it does not mean the items are not there. Telescopes on Earth also cannot see rocks smaller than the LM descent stare -- but there a millions of them on the moon.

To

>They did, it has already been mentioned multiple times in this thread. It is just someone trolling and people don't know how to sage.

You missed my point. Seeing ligght fromthe laser reflectors is not the same as being able to resolve an image of the moon's surface through a telescope that shows objects as small as the LM descent stage or other artifacts left on the moon.

I think one of Trumps advisers actually think this.

But then again, we do have photos of the sites by lunar orbiters. But since those orbiters are courtesy of NASA, somrone allready going 10 on the conspiritard-scale will probably dismiss those as well.

Nah, they just think that the world is only 5500 years old.

It shouldn't matter if you can't get a high enough pixel resolution from the earth. The question posed was "Prove humans were there" and the answer is "Lunar Mirror" It has been independently verified and is used by many research groups. If there was not a mirror, they wouldn't have been able to do their work.


QED

'Dunno, wasn't there lol'

The lunar orbiters that photographed the landing sites are not from the US. Or at least, not the pics that I have seen.

Myreply about not being able to resolve the sites with any earthbound telescopes was accurate, was in no way an argument that the material is not there (resolving power is not an issue if they are not there!) and was in response to a poster who said you could see them with a telescope.

You cannot see them, they are there, but no telescope in existence can resolve objects that small on the surface of the moon from the surface of the Earth, nor can the Hubble from orbit. As has been mentioned many times ITT, they CAN and have been photographed from lunar orbit.

I start by pointing at the giant moon rocket.

I bump fists with them and ask them how they cope with people who think the moon is real

Oh there is plenty of smoke. Aside from the fact fake moon landings is a popular topic...
All of the original astronauts were Masons. These are grown men with religious tendencies who pledge allegiance to a Grand Poobah they may not even know, take extreme blood oaths to follow the Poobahs orders. These oaths by their wording override civil oaths and are the root of many problems in many countries when Masons take public office or other positions that could be compromised by such religious oaths. With that %100 concentration at the astronaut level one can only assume there were many Masons in the upper echelons of the NASA bureaucracy.

2001 A Space Oddity, the art of TV moon drama was already very refined and being pushed on the public.

Missing moon rocks, the bulk of the original samples have mysteriously gone missing, what remains is not available for scrutiny by modern instruments and analysis. With geological technology today almost any rocks origin can be pinpointed.

The retroreflectors often cited as "proof" could have easily just been later planted by unmanned Russian lunar rovers. I myself suspect the entire cold war was a fraud and Russian - US collaboration was always a given after WW2 and lend lease.

It is just one of those things that does not seem provable or they seem to struggle with really hard evidence. I cannot believe 100% or as scientific fact that man has landed on the moon. I am not even trolling. I would like to see it happen, or perhaps men on Mars in modern times. Unmanned rovers are impressive and believable, there is just something about the original moon landings that smells funny is all.

Oh friend, you just opened the floodgates...

I mock them with this

youtube.com/watch?v=P6MOnehCOUw

See:Cool, I think you touched every base.

/Thread

There should be a penalty for stupidity of this magnitude.

>Muh masons
>Muh US/Russian secret collaboration
>Doesn't know thousands of amateur ham operators tracked, triangulated, recorded analogue high frequency voice and video transmissions, in real time from start to finish.

See >I don't understand how...

Hey dipshit, that cross-bar doesn't stretch around all 4 sides. It's only the left side and top of it. Why wouldn't the other sides move?

>All of the original astronauts were Masons
Irrelevant.

>2001 A Space Oddity, the art of TV moon drama was already very refined and being pushed on the public.
Irrelevant.

>Missing moon rocks, the bulk of the original samples have mysteriously gone missing, what remains is not available for scrutiny by modern instruments and analysis
Funny you mention those, because the Apollo 11 moon rocks haven't "gone missing"
source.wustl.edu/2009/07/apollo-11-moon-rocks-still-crucial-40-years-later-say-wustl-researchers-2/

>I myself suspect the entire cold war was a fraud and Russian - US collaboration was always a given after WW2 and lend lease
Uhuh...Right.

>It is just one of those things that does not seem provable or they seem to struggle with really hard evidence. I cannot believe 100% or as scientific fact that man has landed on the moon
And I can't believe 100% or as scientific fact that you're not a shitposter.

So uh... Wanna have sex?

Roll a persuasion check

I was refering to the ones taken by the LRO. Honestly didnt know of any other orbiters that had done it