Why the Moon Hoax makes no sense : Part 6

Part 6 of 9 of 'Why the Moon Hoax makes no sense' presented by Peter Barrett of the Canberra Skeptics on Friday, 13 April 2007 at the Visions Theatre, National Museum of Australia, Acton Peninsula.

There are people who believe that NASA faked the Moon Landings on a sound stage in Area 51, or Sudbury in Canada, or somewhere in Australia - and many people find Moon Hoax arguments superficially convincing.

But the logic which is used to support Moon Hoax arguments very quickly becomes self-contradictory. In fact, it requires NASA to be simultaneously brilliant and stupid. And although Moon Hoax supporters muster what appears to be strong technical evidence in support of their arguments, these arguments are surprisingly easy to demolish.

In this talk, Peter will examine a range of Moon Hoax arguments, explain why they make no sense, and discuss why the Moon Hoax matters. (Don't worry, no technical knowledge is required !)

Related links:

Canberra Skeptics: http://finch.customer.netspace.net.au/skeptics/

Australian Skeptics: http://www.skeptics.com.au/

Moon Base Clavius: http://www.clavius.org

Bad Astronomy: http://www.badastronomy.com

Apollo Lunar Surface Journal: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/frame.html

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• Apollo
• Moon
• landing
• Hoax
• Nasa
• sceptics
• Canberra
• Skeptics

[Haplotype0]

mddawson, thank you for doing this. why do people want to discredit one of if no the most well-documented achievements in human history. This is something we can all get together on, be proud of and point to as a positive thing our species did. I guess people in gen y just can't fathom achieving anything that amazing. Pretty soon we'll be seeing that the pyramids were a hoax too. Oh wait I forgot, aliens built those so they don't count either.

[mddawson1]

@Haplotype0 - most seem to be conspiracy theorists (nutters in other words). They go anomaly hunting picking on tiny details that look odd but they lack the knowledge & education to understand the reasons why things look odd.

[gamr4life]

Amazing how hoax nuts keep repeating the same tired arguments and won't accept rational, scientific, and sometimes obvious, explanations.

Moving flag, moving flag--LOL! Yeah sure, the prop-guy on the movie set where NASA was staging their massive hoax forgot to shut the fan off . . .that or they neglected to shut the window and there was a breeze coming in! Hey--that's the ticket!

[grego805]

after hearing this...or not hearing this sense you cant hear anything, I am totally convinced! Now lets go have some tang!

[mddawson1]

So you did just make it up after all. Yet again its the moon landing denier who lies. Why do you lie? Does it make you feel important or something? What a loser.

[libidowolf]

ha ha ha... don't be an idiot, I don't have you time to answer, plus you know those names better than me, and you are easy to predict, if I say any name you will discredit them, so I don't bother...

[mddawson1]

We are still waiting for the names - or are you like most other deniers, you make stuff up in absence of evidence.

[mddawson1]

Name the people who were involved with Apollo & Gemini who deny the landing. Who are these people?

[libidowolf]

The people who support the hoax are not all ignorants as you affirm, many of them has an extend knowledge in photography and physics many of them were involve in the Apollo an Gemini programs as well.

The evidence is not just constitute on videos and photos.

[mddawson1]

The people who support the hoax present evidence based on their misunderstanding of physics & photography. They have started with the assumption that it was a hoax then look at NASA photos & videos until they find something which looks strange. Of course any human activity on the moon would look strange - its an alien world with properties very different to Earth. Go to skepticwiki to find the answers to the supposed convincing material.

[libidowolf]

Well the presentation will be valid if you have proves to maintain what you say, mate!

And the the people that support the hoax have very convincing material and information is not just nonsenses.

[mddawson1]

Presentation doesn't make the information more or less valid.