SPACE - random thread about space stuff

[Holman]

Do "Apollo truthers" believe that all the moon landings were faked, or just the first?

How do they feel about all the landers and orbiters and space probes sent by NASA and other space agencies to various planets? All faked?

[malchior]

Ugh, Not this shit. It is utter stupidity all the way down. IIRC someone years ago pretty much proved almost all the moon conspiracy theories essentially began as grifts playing on people's credulity. It also follows that these grifts played on general trends that followed public loss of faith in government during the Vietnam War era that started the spiral into the stuff we talk about in P&R.

[Jaymann]

Do "Apollo truthers" believe that all the moon landings were faked, or just the first?

How do they feel about all the landers and orbiters and space probes sent by NASA and other space agencies to various planets? All faked?

I can't speak for Apollo "truthers" but this guy apparently thinks that all the manned flights were faked, not the probes. He points out that NASA created a "no fly zone" around the alleged Apollo landing sites, so that they could not be explored by subsequent probes. That seems a bit fishy.

[raydude]

Here is the best, most comprehensive documentary I have seen on evidence that the moon landings were faked. It's 3 hours long, but trashes all the debunking arguments, including Mythbusters. Feel free to dismiss out of hand, but if you actually watch it you might find that difficult to do. Also find it interesting that YouTube made it difficult to find even though they are awash with flat earth garbage.

I don't see it as comprehensive at all. It takes astronaut's quotes out of context, ignores other recent explorations of the Van Allen radiation belts, and completely ignores the behavior of particles in an airless environment. Comparing the behavior of dust on the moon to dust on Mars is completely wrong given one has an atmostphere (however thin) and the other does not.

[raydude]

Ugh, Not this shit. It is utter stupidity all the way down. IIRC someone years ago pretty much proved almost all the moon conspiracy theories essentially began as grifts playing on people's credulity. It also follows that these grifts played on general trends that followed public loss of faith in government during the Vietnam War era that started the spiral into the stuff we talk about in P&R.

Personally, I also feel some of it is people trying to take the easy way out in making themselves appear smarter. After all, who can resist the lure of being smarter than the average person in "figuring out" the biggest hoax in history without having to invest the time and effort into understanding aerospace engineering or space physics?

[malchior]

Ugh, Not this shit. It is utter stupidity all the way down. IIRC someone years ago pretty much proved almost all the moon conspiracy theories essentially began as grifts playing on people's credulity. It also follows that these grifts played on general trends that followed public loss of faith in government during the Vietnam War era that started the spiral into the stuff we talk about in P&R.

Personally, I also feel some of it is people trying to take the easy way out in making themselves appear smarter. After all, who can resist the lure of being smarter than the average person in "figuring out" the biggest hoax in history without having to invest the time and effort into understanding aerospace engineering or space physics?

Yep - that makes sense. Another factor is that Americans have well-documented penchants for fantasy thinking and this could easily be the ultimate one.

[Kraken]

I'd like to watch the whole thing, but 3.5 hours is a heavy lift. I'm currently 25 minutes in and might come back to it later tonight, but it's going to be in half-hour chunks.

Potentially save me some time: Do they address the single biggest objection -- namely, the large number of scientists and engineers whose complicity would have been required?

[Isgrimnur]

Not to mention the complicity of the Soviets.

[Jaymann]

I'd like to watch the whole thing, but 3.5 hours is a heavy lift. I'm currently 25 minutes in and might come back to it later tonight, but it's going to be in half-hour chunks.

Potentially save me some time: Do they address the single biggest objection -- namely, the large number of scientists and engineers whose complicity would have been required?

Yes, and I have heard this before. The gist is there were thousands working independently, and only a few at the top needed to be complicit.

[malchior]

I'd like to watch the whole thing, but 3.5 hours is a heavy lift. I'm currently 25 minutes in and might come back to it later tonight, but it's going to be in half-hour chunks.

Potentially save me some time: Do they address the single biggest objection -- namely, the large number of scientists and engineers whose complicity would have been required?

Another I wonder about is the fact that Soviets were monitoring the whole thing and crashed Luna 15 trying to outrace NASA returning with lunar rocks. They decided to go along with the fake landing after that failed?

Not to mention the complicity of the Soviets.

Doh - got bammed. Snuck it in there!

[malchior]

I'd like to watch the whole thing, but 3.5 hours is a heavy lift. I'm currently 25 minutes in and might come back to it later tonight, but it's going to be in half-hour chunks.

Potentially save me some time: Do they address the single biggest objection -- namely, the large number of scientists and engineers whose complicity would have been required?

Yes, and I have heard this before. The gist is there were thousands working independently, and only a few at the top needed to be complicit.

That's a explanation that is pretty handwavy and makes absolutely no sense. There were people all over the world running the communication and tracking networks including people in foreign governments. Also, there were independent astronomers who were listening live to the mission communications (and recorded them). It's one thing to fake a presentation. It's another to fake a signal moving in a lunar orbit. Beyond the required conspiracy network depth it is one of the biggest weaknesses.

[Kraken]

This related video dropped a few days ago.



I suppose the high-resolution images of the landing site from the LRO are fake, too.

[stessier]

Here is the best, most comprehensive documentary I have seen on evidence that the moon landings were faked. It's 3 hours long, but trashes all the debunking arguments, including Mythbusters. Feel free to dismiss out of hand, but if you actually watch it you might find that difficult to do. Also find it interesting that YouTube made it difficult to find even though they are awash with flat earth garbage.

Is your position that the landings were faked?

[The Meal]

It... trashes all the debunking arguments

Jaymann's opinion seems clear to me.

[Ralph-Wiggum]

Do "Apollo truthers" believe that all the moon landings were faked, or just the first?

How do they feel about all the landers and orbiters and space probes sent by NASA and other space agencies to various planets? All faked?

This came up on Wait, Wait Don't Tell Me this week and the guest's response was a quote from Charlie Duke: "We’ve been to the moon nine times. If we faked it, why did we fake it nine times?"

[Zaxxon]

Bezos: What if I just give you a pile of money to let us have part of the HLS contract?

[Jaymann]

Here is the best, most comprehensive documentary I have seen on evidence that the moon landings were faked. It's 3 hours long, but trashes all the debunking arguments, including Mythbusters. Feel free to dismiss out of hand, but if you actually watch it you might find that difficult to do. Also find it interesting that YouTube made it difficult to find even though they are awash with flat earth garbage.

Is your position that the landings were faked?

My position was summed up by Collins:

"I don't remember seeing any stars."

[Sudy]

I don't remember going to a tattoo parlour, but that doesn't mean I don't have ink of Dolly Parton comprised of literal melons on my left shin.

[Holman]

Here is the best, most comprehensive documentary I have seen on evidence that the moon landings were faked. It's 3 hours long, but trashes all the debunking arguments, including Mythbusters. Feel free to dismiss out of hand, but if you actually watch it you might find that difficult to do. Also find it interesting that YouTube made it difficult to find even though they are awash with flat earth garbage.

Is your position that the landings were faked?

My position was summed up by Collins:

"I don't remember seeing any stars."

What is that even supposed to mean, conspiracy-wise? Did they supposedly trick Collins into thinking he was orbiting the moon when he wasn't? (But they forget to add stars outside?)

I'll take the offer and dismiss the video out of hand.

[Isgrimnur]

I don't remember going to a tattoo parlour, but that doesn't mean I don't have ink of Dolly Parton comprised of literal melons on my left shin.

I’ve never seen a Love Butt this far South.

[stessier]

Here is the best, most comprehensive documentary I have seen on evidence that the moon landings were faked. It's 3 hours long, but trashes all the debunking arguments, including Mythbusters. Feel free to dismiss out of hand, but if you actually watch it you might find that difficult to do. Also find it interesting that YouTube made it difficult to find even though they are awash with flat earth garbage.

Is your position that the landings were faked?

My position was summed up by Collins:

"I don't remember seeing any stars."

What is that even supposed to mean, conspiracy-wise? Did they supposedly trick Collins into thinking he was orbiting the moon when he wasn't? (But they forget to add stars outside?)

I'll take the offer and dismiss the video out of hand.

Wish choice.

First 30 minutes is talking about the people and why they would have wanted to fake it, using future results (things that happened in the 80-2000s) as evidence for people's motivations in the 60s.

Second 30 minutes is dismissing all the evidence that points to the landings being real because it is possible to fake it.

Next 30 minutes is going to be about their evidence.

[Jaymann]

Here is the best, most comprehensive documentary I have seen on evidence that the moon landings were faked. It's 3 hours long, but trashes all the debunking arguments, including Mythbusters. Feel free to dismiss out of hand, but if you actually watch it you might find that difficult to do. Also find it interesting that YouTube made it difficult to find even though they are awash with flat earth garbage.

Is your position that the landings were faked?

My position was summed up by Collins:

"I don't remember seeing any stars."

What is that even supposed to mean, conspiracy-wise? Did they supposedly trick Collins into thinking he was orbiting the moon when he wasn't? (But they forget to add stars outside?)

I'll take the offer and dismiss the video out of hand.

Let me get this straight. These 3 astronauts have presumably returned from the greatest mission in the history of mankind and are asked a simple question about what the stars looked like. They start glancing at each other in confusion (you might think they weren't prepped for this question). Collins, who was allegedly in the lunar orbiter with nothing better to do, cannot remember whether he saw any stars. Possibly the single lamest response in history. Why didn't he just say, "Oh they were wonderful."

You could interpret this that since Armstrong and Aldrin said they couldn't see any stars, he didn't know what he was supposed to say, so he equivocated. He can't use the excuse that he was on the sunny side of the moon, because he was allegedly in orbit.

Bezos only went up about seven times as high as a 747. Ask him if he saw any stars.

[stessier]

Here is the best, most comprehensive documentary I have seen on evidence that the moon landings were faked. It's 3 hours long, but trashes all the debunking arguments, including Mythbusters. Feel free to dismiss out of hand, but if you actually watch it you might find that difficult to do. Also find it interesting that YouTube made it difficult to find even though they are awash with flat earth garbage.

Is your position that the landings were faked?

My position was summed up by Collins:

"I don't remember seeing any stars."

What is that even supposed to mean, conspiracy-wise? Did they supposedly trick Collins into thinking he was orbiting the moon when he wasn't? (But they forget to add stars outside?)

I'll take the offer and dismiss the video out of hand.

Let me get this straight. These 3 astronauts have presumably returned from the greatest mission in the history of mankind and are asked a simple question about what the stars looked like. They start glancing at each other in confusion (you might think they weren't prepped for this question). Collins, who was allegedly in the lunar orbiter with nothing better to do, cannot remember whether he saw any stars. Possibly the single lamest response in history. Why didn't he just say, "Oh they were wonderful."

You could interpret this that since Armstrong and Aldrin said they couldn't see any stars, he didn't know what he was supposed to say, so he equivocated. He can't use the excuse that he was on the sunny side of the moon, because he was allegedly in orbit.

Bezos only went up about seven times as high as a 747. Ask him if he saw any stars.

That's not what he said. He said he didn't see any on the daylight side of the moon or the solar corona without using optics.

[Zaxxon]

Bezos: What if I just give you a pile of money to let us have part of the HLS contract?

This actual news was lost in all the conspiracy theory drivel, so here's more on it.

[Daehawk]

Harvard-led team to search cosmos for extraterrestrial space tech and UFOs

I like the pic they used for the article

[Holman]

That's not what he said. He said he didn't see any on the daylight side of the moon or the solar corona without using optics.

Yep. To interpret the astronauts' responses there as the smoking gun that was all a fake is just complete absurdity.

But to embrace it, the theory would have to be that the conspiracy did not include the astronauts themselves. They were given an experience that seamlessly simulated three days of weightlessness and a complete sense of orbiting/landing on the moon, but NASA forgot to paint stars on the backcloth.

[Jaymann]

Here is the best, most comprehensive documentary I have seen on evidence that the moon landings were faked. It's 3 hours long, but trashes all the debunking arguments, including Mythbusters. Feel free to dismiss out of hand, but if you actually watch it you might find that difficult to do. Also find it interesting that YouTube made it difficult to find even though they are awash with flat earth garbage.

Is your position that the landings were faked?

My position was summed up by Collins:

"I don't remember seeing any stars."

What is that even supposed to mean, conspiracy-wise? Did they supposedly trick Collins into thinking he was orbiting the moon when he wasn't? (But they forget to add stars outside?)

I'll take the offer and dismiss the video out of hand.

Let me get this straight. These 3 astronauts have presumably returned from the greatest mission in the history of mankind and are asked a simple question about what the stars looked like. They start glancing at each other in confusion (you might think they weren't prepped for this question). Collins, who was allegedly in the lunar orbiter with nothing better to do, cannot remember whether he saw any stars. Possibly the single lamest response in history. Why didn't he just say, "Oh they were wonderful."

You could interpret this that since Armstrong and Aldrin said they couldn't see any stars, he didn't know what he was supposed to say, so he equivocated. He can't use the excuse that he was on the sunny side of the moon, because he was allegedly in orbit.

Bezos only went up about seven times as high as a 747. Ask him if he saw any stars.

That's not what he said. He said he didn't see any on the daylight side of the moon or the solar corona without using optics.

I went back and checked. You are quoting Armstrong. Right after that Collins said, "I don't remember seeing anything."

[Daehawk]

The landings were real.

[stessier]

Here is the best, most comprehensive documentary I have seen on evidence that the moon landings were faked. It's 3 hours long, but trashes all the debunking arguments, including Mythbusters. Feel free to dismiss out of hand, but if you actually watch it you might find that difficult to do. Also find it interesting that YouTube made it difficult to find even though they are awash with flat earth garbage.

Is your position that the landings were faked?

My position was summed up by Collins:

"I don't remember seeing any stars."

What is that even supposed to mean, conspiracy-wise? Did they supposedly trick Collins into thinking he was orbiting the moon when he wasn't? (But they forget to add stars outside?)

I'll take the offer and dismiss the video out of hand.

Let me get this straight. These 3 astronauts have presumably returned from the greatest mission in the history of mankind and are asked a simple question about what the stars looked like. They start glancing at each other in confusion (you might think they weren't prepped for this question). Collins, who was allegedly in the lunar orbiter with nothing better to do, cannot remember whether he saw any stars. Possibly the single lamest response in history. Why didn't he just say, "Oh they were wonderful."

You could interpret this that since Armstrong and Aldrin said they couldn't see any stars, he didn't know what he was supposed to say, so he equivocated. He can't use the excuse that he was on the sunny side of the moon, because he was allegedly in orbit.

Bezos only went up about seven times as high as a 747. Ask him if he saw any stars.

That's not what he said. He said he didn't see any on the daylight side of the moon or the solar corona without using optics.

I went back and checked. You are quoting Armstrong. Right after that Collins said, "I don't remember seeing anything."

Exactly. Follow the conversation.

Did you see stars and the solar corona without optics? What was it like on the surface?

The surface was a few inches thick. We were on the daylight side, there were no stars.
Yeah, we didn't see any stars.
Collins: I don't remember seeing any.

He clearly was talking about seeing anything in the daylight which was how the question was asked.

[Holman]

I went back and checked. You are quoting Armstrong. Right after that Collins said, "I don't remember seeing anything."

He's saying it to confirm what Armstrong just said.

There's no sense at all that he means "Hold on, where in hell were the stars??"

[Zaxxon]

This is a thing that we're doing, eh?

[stessier]

This is a thing that we're doing, eh?

It was this or the football thing. I found this more important.

[jztemple2]

Bezos: What if I just give you a pile of money to let us have part of the HLS contract?

This actual news was lost in all the conspiracy theory drivel, so here's more on it.

That Ars Technica article was very good, thanks for posting it. If I were Bill Nelson I'd take up Bezos' offer, a little competition is a good thing to tighten up the designs.

On the other thing, I don't need to watch for three hours to know that it's crap.

[raydude]

I suppose the high-resolution images of the landing site from the LRO are fake, too.

I know the scientist who is the PI of the LRO camera and several scientists who worked with the LRO imagery. Also, I have some experience with putting together images from downlinked telemetry. To suggest that any of them are part of a conspiracy to put fake Apollo features into LROC images or that one could even sneak that within a data pipeline somehow with no one knowing is ludicrous and beyond belief.

[Holman]

I know the scientist who is the PI of the LRO camera and several scientists who worked with the LRO imagery. Also, I have some experience with putting together images from downlinked telemetry. To suggest that any of them are part of a conspiracy to put fake Apollo features into LROC images or that one could even sneak that within a data pipeline somehow with no one knowing is ludicrous and beyond belief.

Are you trying to tell me that's a picture of the moon? It's not even round!

[Daehawk]

I dont see the cheese.

[Kraken]

Bezos: What if I just give you a pile of money to let us have part of the HLS contract?

This actual news was lost in all the conspiracy theory drivel, so here's more on it.

This strikes me as a win for NASA, a win for Bezos, and a win for competition. As much as I want to reflexively hate on the billionaire, I don't see a downside to accepting his offer. Redundant landing systems will be good to have, especially if SpaceX can't turn Starship into Moonship* before Artemis 3 is ready. While Moonship is more capable and will probably prove to be more economical, Blue Origin's Apollo-style lander is going to be easier to develop quickly.

*my name for it

[raydude]

Bezos: What if I just give you a pile of money to let us have part of the HLS contract?

This actual news was lost in all the conspiracy theory drivel, so here's more on it.

This strikes me as a win for NASA, a win for Bezos, and a win for competition. As much as I want to reflexively hate on the billionaire, I don't see a downside to accepting his offer. Redundant landing systems will be good to have, especially if SpaceX can't turn Starship into Moonship* before Artemis 3 is ready. While Moonship is more capable and will probably prove to be more economical, Blue Origin's Apollo-style lander is going to be easier to develop quickly.

*my name for it

I don't see it as a win if NASA has to redo the initial competition - that delays the Artemis program. Not to mention it sets a bad precedent - just because you lose the initial competition all it takes is for the loser to say they will self-invest more money and they get to recompete? No thanks. I am all for a follow-on competition for the landers.

[Zaxxon]

I don't think redoing the competition is a realistic outcome, from the scuttlebutt I've seen on Twitter from folks in the know like Garver and Berger. Follow-on is much more likely.

[Kraken]

Yeah, I just assumed it will be a follow-on. If Bezos wants NASA to undo the SpaceX contract, that should be a hard no.